Hi,
See my previous post..
bye
Norman
Am Sonntag, den 23.07.2006, 22:41 -0400 schrieb Noel J. Bergman:
> > POP3 before SMTP was a quick hack because POP3 already had authentication,
> > and SMTP didn't have it (at the time). Even sites, such as ORDB, that
> > recommend POP3 before SMTP say that
Ho Noel,
Am Sonntag, den 23.07.2006, 19:27 -0400 schrieb Noel J. Bergman:
> Norman wrote:
>
> > schrieb Noel J. Bergman:
> > > There are many ways to handle RoamingUsers. POPBeforeSMTP is at
> > > least descriptive.
>
> > I called it RoaminUsersHandler cause we could easly use it for
> > IMAPBe
Hi Noel,
Am Montag, 24. Juli 2006 04:15 schrieb Noel J. Bergman:
> And in ancient days, almost all mail servers were open relays. And we also
> didn't used to have so many hotels, Internet cafes, offices, even some
> service providers, using non-routable subnets and a single gateway IP. But
> wi
> POP3 before SMTP was a quick hack because POP3 already had authentication,
> and SMTP didn't have it (at the time). Even sites, such as ORDB, that
> recommend POP3 before SMTP say that STMP AUTH would be preferable.
Sendmail says "[SMTP AUTH] is useful for roaming users and can replace
POP-befo
Jürgen Hoffmann wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman:
> > Something more important: I am -1 on the current code. The technical
> > justification for vetoing this change is that we are tracking only the
> > IP address. One person on a non-routable subnet authenticates via POP3
> > or IMAP, and everyone else
Hi,
Am Montag, 24. Juli 2006 01:27 schrieb Noel J. Bergman:
> Something more important: I am -1 on the current code. The technical
> justification for vetoing this change is that we are tracking only the IP
> address. One person on a non-routable subnet authenticates via POP3 or
> IMAP, and ever
> Norman Maurer wrote:
> > BTW, after think a bit about this there is no need for implemt
> > ConnectionHandler on this type of check. Cause the "error code"
> > get returned on RCPT.. So it whould be enought to implement
> > CommandHandler.
> Right, I think that every autorization/relay check sho
Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> The creation of a skin will allow me to remove all of the duplicate code
> I put in site, server and jspf repositories (css and images).
> Where should I put this code?
Under site/ would be my suggestion.
> Should I create a maven-skin folder in the root of the james re
Norman wrote:
> schrieb Noel J. Bergman:
> > There are many ways to handle RoamingUsers. POPBeforeSMTP is at
> > least descriptive.
> I called it RoaminUsersHandler cause we could easly use it for
> IMAPBeforeSMTP if imap is included. So i thought this "general"
> name is the best.
Too general.
Thx for the tip.. Stefano allready tells me that this will maybe the
better way.. let us see.
thx
Norman
Am Sonntag, den 23.07.2006, 19:30 +0200 schrieb Zsombor:
> Instead of this, you should modify the code to:
>
> public static void removeExpiredIP(long clearTime) {
>synchronized(ipMap)
Instead of this, you should modify the code to:
public static void removeExpiredIP(long clearTime) {
synchronized(ipMap) {
Iterator storedIP = ipMap.keySet().iterator();
long currTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
while (storedIP.hasNext()) {
String key =
Author: norman
Date: Sun Jul 23 10:15:56 2006
New Revision: 424769
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=424769&view=rev
Log:
Catch ConcurrentModificationException if its thrown
Modified:
james/server/trunk/src/java/org/apache/james/util/RoaminUsersHelper.java
Modified:
james/server/trunk/s
Author: norman
Date: Sun Jul 23 09:33:40 2006
New Revision: 424766
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=424766&view=rev
Log:
Only checks for RoaminUser if the ip is not allowed to relay
Get sure RoaminUsersHelper is thread safe
Add new junit test
Modified:
james/server/trunk/src/java/org/ap
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
3) We start having a little mess with authorized users, relaying
allowed, authorized networks and how handlers manage this. Let's
keep in mind this and maybe we'll find a clean solution to this.
I don't disagree. What if anything do you have in mind at this time?
Noth
Am Sonntag, den 23.07.2006, 11:55 -0400 schrieb Noel J. Bergman:
> > I don't know if "RoamingUsers" is better or worst than "PopBeforeSmtp":
> > what do ther thinks?
>
> There are many ways to handle RoamingUsers. POPBeforeSMTP is at least
> descriptive.
I called it RoaminUsersHandler cause we
On 7/22/06, Norman Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mornin..
ATM i'm using a stripped down james with SMTP serving on a high with
> everything else stripped out. i'm using commons-email to create test
> messages to play around with. would probably want to move to unit
testing
> when i get
> I don't know if "RoamingUsers" is better or worst than "PopBeforeSmtp":
> what do ther thinks?
There are many ways to handle RoamingUsers. POPBeforeSMTP is at least
descriptive.
> 2) Before 3.0 I would like to find a better solution than hardcoding the
> check in PassCmdHandler (maybe suppo
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-575?page=all ]
Robert Burrell Donkin updated JAMES-575:
Attachment: mailet-sdk.tar.gz
Basic development setup for Mailets.
> Improved MailetSDK
> --
>
> Key: JAMES-575
Improved MailetSDK
--
Key: JAMES-575
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-575
Project: James
Issue Type: New Feature
Components: Mailet API
Affects Versions: 2.3.0b3
Reporter: Robert Burre
I just submitted all the Javamail bugs I was aware of.
They have been assigned the following internal review ids:
759380 - 8bit messages created from stream are not converted to 7bit
759385 - Headers order for InternetHeaders read from stream are not
always correct
759389 - NullPointerException
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-555?page=all ]
Stefano Bagnara updated JAMES-555:
--
Fix Version/s: 3.0
(was: 2.3.0)
Moving this issue to the next release as we entered RC status and we don't
apply further code changes
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-565?page=all ]
Stefano Bagnara updated JAMES-565:
--
Fix Version/s: 3.0
(was: 2.3.0)
Moving this issue to the next release as we entered RC status and we don't
apply further code changes
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-572?page=all ]
Stefano Bagnara updated JAMES-572:
--
Attachment: maven-skin-1-src.tar.gz
The maven2 skin module for james project.
> Create a common look and feel for James project, server, and other james
>
I've been able to create a maven2-skin for the current proposal
(http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/site-20060723/).
The creation of a skin will allow me to remove all of the duplicate code
I put in site, server and jspf repositories (css and images).
Where should I put this cod
bute
them.
They are totally different approaches.
The apache page is a set of links most of them are useless to the james
user and only useful for us (james committers, or even only james pmc).
I still think that this page:
http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/site-20060723/server/source-repos
Norman Maurer wrote:
BTW, after think a bit about this there is no need for implemt
ConnectionHandler on this type of check. Cause the "error code" get
returned on RCPT.. So it whould be enought to implement CommandHandler.
Any thoughts ?
Right,
I think that every autorization/relay check sho
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-444?page=comments#action_12422890 ]
Stefano Bagnara commented on JAMES-444:
---
Attach interesting comments from the list:
---
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>> http://issues.apache.org
Hi Norman,
1) I think that the correct name is RoamingUsers (note the G after roamin).
I don't know if "RoamingUsers" is better or worst than "PopBeforeSmtp":
what do ther thinks?
I like RoamingUsers as a name but I don't know what would be the most
intuitive name to our users.
2) Before 3
Author: bago
Date: Sun Jul 23 05:34:32 2006
New Revision: 424725
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=424725&view=rev
Log:
Fix javadocs->apidocs link for maven2 generate site.
Modified:
james/server/trunk/src/site/site.xml
Modified: james/server/trunk/src/site/site.xml
URL:
http://svn.apac
Here I am with a newer version:
http://people.apache.org/~bago/james/site-20060723/
Please let me know what is the *minimal* set of changes to receive a +1
to publish this one instead of the current website.
Furthermore please enumerate any other change that you'd like to see so
that
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-569?page=all ]
Norman Maurer resolved JAMES-569.
-
Resolution: Fixed
> Add Support for POP-before-SMTP (roaming users)
> ---
>
> Key: JAMES-569
>
Author: norman
Date: Sun Jul 23 04:38:54 2006
New Revision: 424721
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=424721&view=rev
Log:
Some code improvments and a new junit test
Modified:
james/server/trunk/src/java/org/apache/james/smtpserver/core/RoaminUsersHandler.java
james/server/trunk/src/j
Author: norman
Date: Sun Jul 23 04:23:27 2006
New Revision: 424713
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=424713&view=rev
Log:
Fix a bug in setting expireTime.
Modified:
james/server/trunk/src/java/org/apache/james/smtpserver/core/RoaminUsersHandler.java
Modified:
james/server/trunk/src/jav
Author: norman
Date: Sun Jul 23 04:20:21 2006
New Revision: 424712
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=424712&view=rev
Log:
Allow to specify the expiretime in units.
Add junit test
Added:
james/server/trunk/src/test/org/apache/james/smtpserver/RoaminUsersHandlerTest.java
Modified:
jam
Author: norman
Date: Sun Jul 23 04:10:51 2006
New Revision: 424709
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=424709&view=rev
Log:
Add support for RoaminUsers (pop before smtp). See JAMES-569
Added:
james/server/trunk/src/java/org/apache/james/smtpserver/core/RoaminUsersHandler.java
james/ser
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-574?page=all ]
Stefano Bagnara updated JAMES-574:
--
Fix Version/s: 2.3.0rc2
(was: 2.3.0rc1)
(was: 3.0)
Affects Version/s: (was: 3.0)
> Annoying
Author: bago
Date: Sun Jul 23 03:31:48 2006
New Revision: 424704
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=424704&view=rev
Log:
Updated pom.xml to include all the james dependencies.
Now, it is able to run the build and tests (to create javadocs/reports).
Run "mvn site" and copy target/site to the sit
Stefano,
I agree :-) .
Ciao,
Vincenzo
Stefano Bagnara wrote:
Vincenzo Gianferrari Pini wrote:
I don't want this to become a religion war (by definition a matter of
personal views :-) ).
-0 is not a war ;-). In fact -0 is not a valid vote on code
modifications. Only -1 and +1 are valid
Vincenzo Gianferrari Pini wrote:
I don't want this to become a religion war (by definition a matter of
personal views :-) ).
-0 is not a war ;-). In fact -0 is not a valid vote on code
modifications. Only -1 and +1 are valid for "code modification" votes
and 3 +1 are lazy consensus. So my -0
I don't want this to become a religion war (by definition a matter of
personal views :-) ).
In any case I agree that a small bug like this should not delay the
timings for releasing 2.3.0 final. Rc1 is already tagged and should be
released as is.
For me is a +1 to apply the patch in the foll
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Anyone know why this is still defaulting to false instead of true? I use
true in my own config.xml.
--- Noel
I also use true in my main production server.
That said I never tested it too much because less than 1% of my outgoing
mail have multiple recipients.
41 matches
Mail list logo
